8 Interviewee story summaries Donna expressed the view that the decision-making process at the PBC was not respectful enough of traditional decision-making processes and that members and Gunditjmara people as Common Law Holders were not provided with sufficient accessible information. Our Elders and people would sit for hours at meetings, sometime 8–9 hours listening to Government agencies, academics, lawyers speak on Native Title matters … They tell us what we’re doing, there’s no proper cultural governance decision-making process that respects our culture. Donna feels strongly that it is important to empower the community and has raised with the PBC the need to provide appropriate information and time for her people to digest and understand it. In addition to the native title side of land justice, Donna also expressed serious concerns that there is no capacity to identify the right people to speak for country in the Cultural Heritage Management Plan scheme. The corporation’s cultural heritage management system should provide the opportunity for families and clan groups to be notified and consulted, but Donna says ‘we don’t have that next process in place to do that … we don’t have the systems and we’re not enabling that.’ Ultimately, Donna felt that that the group was conflicted in large part because the dispossession throughout history means ‘it is so important that everyone in the group upholds Gunditjmara lore, culture, our protocols, and understands what is at stake if things are not done the right way’. We are constantly ‘fighting’ to be heard to have a voice. We feel disempowered in our community. Australian Human Rights Commission 105